The Downside

Except for Bost, Bush, and Karmeier, everyone else I endorsed lost. (Maybe I shouldn't have written on their backs.)

Now it's time to bite my nails over what Stephen Green calls the downside:

Bush's lame-duck judicial selections -- especially with an increased Republican Senate majority -- might just give one pause. Will Bush stick to his promise of nominating strict constructionists, or might he feel free to nominate fundamentalist judges? I'm no worrywart convinced that Republicans are out to overturn Roe v Wade, but you can never be too sure. Even if the courts remain in good hands, a second Bush term might mean further intrusion on stem-cell research.

Republicans increased their majorities in the House and Senate. One thing majorities like to do is keep things exactly as they are -- and the safest way to do that is to keep buying votes… er -- keep increasing spending. Bush refused to veto a single spending bill in his first four years, and it's hard to imagine him becoming more susceptible to popular pressure to reign in spending during his lame duck term. You can also bet that those new Republican Congressmen and Senators will feel the need to prove their abilities to bring home the pork. Buh-bye, fiscal sanity.

And don't even get me started on Bush's insane Medicare expansion from last year. If that's an indication of how he intends to deal with our growing health care crisis, then there's hardly any difference any more between Democrats and Republicans.

Also at TCS, Uriah Kriegel suggests getting rid of Ashcroft & Rumsfeld and bringing in people like Giuliani & McCain, and even "a hawkish Democrat".

Bush must also make a significant step by way of compromising on one of the central tenets of his agenda. Raising taxes is clearly out of question for him. But a bombshell announcement on, say, stem cell research or immigration, may do wonders to mollify his more intense critics and go some distance towards reunifying the nation. Hopefully, such a move can be sold to his base precisely as such -- as a token of respect for the other half of the nation. Such a gesture would betray another type of genuine patriotism.

I don't think it'll happen, though. On the other hand, in Last chance for the Democrats? the Economist's Lexington argued the Republicans had more to gain from a victory in this election, because

they think they can use a second Bush term to turn themselves into America's de facto ruling party....[T]he Republicans have put emasculating the Democrats at the very heart of their second-term agenda. They plan to reduce its footsoldiers by contracting out hundreds of thousands of federal jobs, to reduce its income through tort reform (which may slim down the lawyers' wallets) and right-to-work laws (which will allow workers to opt out of union dues). And they plan to boost the number of people who own shares—and hence a stake in the success of the capitalist system—by beginning to privatise Social Security.

But then Buttonwood argues,

the re-election of George Bush does nothing to ease Buttonwood’s long-term fears. That would take an administration with far greater intellectual clout and economic literacy than the bunch that has just kept control of the White House.